Re: Symantec Storage Foundation for Oracle RAC

I'm not sure what you're trying to get at, and don't really see why you wouldn't come right out and say it, but anyway..

So, the particular solution that I'm looking at employs a Global Clustering Option. So, whatever happens at the primary site to cause a failure (earthquake, wild fire, etc..) that the company deems as an outage, would kick off the remote site to come online as the primary database.

Ken

Original message --------------
From: Tim Gorman <tim_at_evdbt.com>
Would an earthquake level just part of a data center? Do wildfires only burn the 3rd server in a rack and not the 4th, sparing the storage in the next cabinet over?

In what way does RAC (or any clustering solution, such as SFOR) protect against such threats?

ken_nguyen_at_comcast.net wrote:
Tim,

As Finn mentioned, I'm looking at this to provide HA. This is for a location in SoCal, so its prone to earthquakes, and most recently, wild fires.

RAC/SFOR/HACMP/VCS etc are for high availability. Not disaster recovery. As such, it's for the type of "disasters" that involve losing 1 server. Anything else you would need a DR setup to handle.

Finn

On 10/29/07, Tim Gorman <tim_at_evdbt.com> wrote:
Well......out of all the possible (and probable) range of faults and failures, exactly what types of "disasters" does clustering such as RAC or SFOR protect against?

ken_nguyen_at_comcast.net wrote:
>It has to be a very selective disaster for clustering (i.e. RAC, HACMP, etc) to provide much protection.

Tim-

Sorry, I don't understand what that means.

Ken

Original message --------------
From: Tim Gorman <tim_at_evdbt.com>
It has to be a very selective disaster for clustering (i.e. RAC, HACMP, etc) to provide much protection.

ken_nguyen_at_comcast.net wrote:
Dan, thanks for the feedback.

We're trying to protect more than just the Oracle DB. While CRS and Dataguard work well to provide HA, it doesn't take into account the Siebel, IIS, etc installs that form the entire application stack.

With this solution, we're hoping to lower the TCO in the event of a disaster.

I have used the SFOR previously, but not on the current versions and not with 10g DB. I had no problems with the SFOR software.

If I were implementing a cluster today with 10g, I wouldn't use any non-Oracle clusterware. Instead, I'd just use Oracle Clusterware as it provides all the HA you'll need for the DB. Maybe you have other reasons for using SFOR...I hope you do because I couldn't justify the investment given the current architecture.

Oracle has fully certified most of the components within this Symantec solution, except for the automatic failover piece (GCO).
This component is certified on all platforms except for Red Hat, could have something to do with Oracle˘s OEL initiative.

Is anyone using this or any other Symantec SF products without any issues?